While all of us at Multiversity are fans of a wide spectrum of comics, there are a few of us that tend to self-identify as “DC guys.” We’ve cried for justice; we’ve been through the blackest nights and the brightest days. And now, we’ve been culled together for a new column to focus on some of the bigger goings on in the world of Detective Comics Comics. We are the DC3.
In our inaugural edition, we have gathered to discuss the various creative shake-ups that have been present over the past month and a half at DC.
Vince Ostrowski: Okay, so let’s start with Charles Soule’s “Swamp Thing:” What did you guys think of the new direction?
Zach Wilkerson: I really like it so far. It’s a fun change of pace after a year and a half of the Rot. I do think it’s strange that Alec has essentially reverted back to the Alan Moore incarnation of Swamp Thing (his mind in a plant’s body), though that’s more on Snyder than Soule. Kano is a fantastic addition to the book. His transitions through the Green are up there with Paquette’s most elaborate work, and the way his Swampy morphs based on the environment is a great touch. As much as I enjoyed the early issues of Snyder’s run, I think Soule’s take is off to a better start overall.
Brian Salvatore: I think Soule is off to a good start on the book. Following up someone like Snyder is tough because, true or not, the perception of Snyder’s run is that he reinvigorated the title/character. Personally, I found Snyder’s run to be a little dull and drawn out. Yanick Paquette is such an incredible artist, and his early work on the book felt more like he was illustrating a children’s book with tons of prose, rather than a comic, where action was happening all the time.
Soule, on the other hand, is doing his own story with Swampy, one more dynamic and tightly constructed than Snyder’s. Kano’s art suits the story well, as well. In fact, of all the new creative teams save one (which we will get to later), this one seems to be the most simpatico, in terms of style and mission statement. Vince, what say you?
Vince: I agree. Not to knock Snyder’s run, but I have a feeling that people really wanted to like Swamp Thing after “Brightest Day” happened, which may have elevated opinions of that book. At least until ‘Rotworld’ happened, which is where both it and “Animal Man” started to lose their luster.
I think the one thing that Snyder and Paquette’s “Swamp Thing” did extremely well that no other big 2 book was really doing was that central love story between Alec and Abigail. They spent enough time developing it and it felt very honest. The art captured this aspect beautifully as well.
I like that Soule is taking the human aspect away from the Swamp Thing and internalizing it. I think he’s doing a good job of writing within the ‘New 52’ status quo, but keeping things fun. And of course, I’ll echo everything you guys have said about Kano’s art.
Jim Starlin’s “Stormwatch” came out that week too, but I have to say I hated that first issue. I have no problem with a new creator coming in and throwing everything out on a book that isn’t working, but he replaced it with a team and concept that ended up just feeling like more of the same. Do you guys agree?
Brian: I take exception to the idea that it is “more of the same.” If it was more of the same, it would be a disappointingly bland series with a ton of potential being wasted. “Stormwatch” #19, on the other hand, was an aggressively dull, shockingly dated-looking attempt to capture something or other. I don’t know man, that was a pretty depressing issue. Do you agree, Zach?
Zach: I do wholeheartedly. This was truly WTF certified, if that’s what DC was going for. I hate to be disparaging towards the creators but everything about this, the plot, the dialogue, the character designs, seems like a joke. I literally cannot see how anyone at DC could look at this product and be proud of it, especially when you compare it to the legacy of its predecessor, “The Authority.” I can’t decide which part is more depressing, that this reboot moves the team even further from what made the Wildstorm incarnation great, or the fact Starlin felt a second reboot was the best way to salvage the book. My only hope is that the next inevitable creative change will do away with this ridiculous alternate timeline. /End Rant
Continued belowUnless someone has something positive to add, I think it’s probably best to move on to the third new creative team introduced that week. While the status quo change in “Batwing” #19 was nearly as abrupt as the one in “Stormwatch,” I think it’s ultimately a change for the better. Palmiotti and Gray did a great job depicting David’s burnout. Clearly, not everyone is able to function as a “Batman.” I was never a huge fan of the character, even under Morrison, so his departure doesn’t really affect me one way or the other. I like the design of the new suit, but I found the identity of the new Batwing to be a bit too convenient. Brian, I know you enjoyed at least the early issues of “Batwing,” are you sad to see David go?
Brian: I am quite sad to see David go, as this new incarnation of Batwing GOES AGAINST THE ENTIRE MISSION STATEMENT OF THE BOOK. The book was supposed to tell the story of the Batman of Africa, and the book is becoming something completely different. I could cry quasi-racism, but I’ve beat that drum before. This all seems like a very coldly calculated attempt by DC brass to have their cake and eat it, too – they get to still have a book called “Batwing,” and get to avoid most cries of racism because the character is African-American. I like Palmiotti and Gray a lot, and I’m sure that this wasn’t entirely their idea, but I was not impressed by their first issue on the book. Vince, did you enjoy it?
Vince: I didn’t think it was a terrible issue, but it did drop everything that was unique or interesting about “Batwing.” I don’t hold the Winick & Oliver story arcs in as high a regard as you do, Brian, but I appreciated that they actually felt like they were following through on the promise made by the New 52 by feeling significantly different. But even the “David Zavimbe as Batwing” issues already played too safe by folding Batman and Gotham City into the proceedings as often as they could.
To be honest, this feels more like Palmiotti and Gray in their “Freedom Fighters” mode. That is to say, it was about as generic as superhero stories get. Not offensively bad, but no reason to return to it. As a symbol of the New 52, however, it cheapens things. I’m not sure how the change of the person under the mantle and the reconfigured location will help the title sell any better, if the storytelling isn’t consistently better.
Do either of you plan on following the title further? Personally, I’m done with “Batwing” for a while.
Zach: I wasn’t following it regularly before and nothing about the new direction makes me want to start.
Brian: I had dropped the book once Winick departed, so I’m out on this one for the foreseeable future. If they had done something interesting, I’d have given it at least a few issues to impress me. But, alas, they didn’t.
But the news hasn’t been all bad around the fringes of the Bat-books, as “Suicide Squad” was taken over by the team of writer Ales Kot and artist Patrick Zircher. Personally, I found this issue more interesting and promising than the prior issues combined. Did you guys have similar thoughts?
Vince: Oh my gosh, I could write a book on how right Kot got it on his first issue. I’ll let you guys go first on this one, just so I don’t get redundant in my praises.
Zach: I wrote the review for the issue, and made it Pick of the Week, so I fear I’m in danger of redundancy as well. Suffice it to say that Kot and Zircher have, in just one issue, made a book very few cared about into one of the few must read New 52 titles. We all complain about how grim and homogenized the New 52 is, and while Suicide Squad is very dark, it’s also fun. It’s impossible not to chuckle at Harley’s cat pajamas or King Shark’s vegan diet. Add in James Gordon Jr., a character I and many others have loved since Snyder’s “Detective” run, and you have a book that just wont quit.
Continued belowBrian: Well said. The book manages to accomplish its three goals clearly and easily in the first issue: make you care about the characters, give a compelling story, and look good. It is amazing how many books being published don’t do those three things.
This also ties it a little closer to the Bat-books, which sales wise, is a smart thing to do, especially with the ever-collapsing extended DCU. I wish the book stood on its own more, but I’m not John Q. Comicsbuyer.
Vince: I’m not nearly the first to make comparisons to Grant Morrison, and I actually don’t think they’re really very similar writers, but I was reminded of the way that Morrison thinks about characters when I read Kot’s first issue of “Suicide Squad.”
Morrison often talks about how he takes a hero or villain and tries to examine how they would tackle their ultimate challenge, or some sort of meaningful antagonist on a metaphysical level – well, that’s exactly what Kot does here for each of the members of the Suicide Squad. I was reminded of the way that Morrison had Two-Face weened off of his coin and onto dice in “Arkham Asylum.” “How would King Shark try to fight his most base urges?” Well, he’d try to become a vegan. It works as a joke, because who doesn’t love a good joke about a vegan? But it also works as a clever examination of character that comes off a whole lot better than your usual angst-ridden grimdark villain pabulum.
Your average 5 or 6 out of 10 comic book has a villain thrown at a hero. The villain loses or gets away to fight another day and maybe the life of the hero’s alter ego moves along a little bit. In just one issue, Kot and Zircher’s “Suicide Squad” has earned the goodwill for me to follow them for the long haul. I can tell that not only is Kot thinking about the chess pieces that he’s playing with a lot more critically than most writers do, but that he and Zircher are on the same page in delivering a book that isn’t satisfied with being average.
Zach: I agree, it definitely has the biggest increase in quality and is probably the best book of the bunch.
Brian: Sadly, “Superboy,” a book I had high hopes for, fell really flat for me. New writer Justin Jordan came on board and, sadly, gave us more of the same. The ominous cover notwithstanding, there was little to differentiate this from the Scott Lobdell/Tom DeFalco work that preceded it.
Am I being too hard on this book, or do you guys concur?
Vince: I was just as disappointed as you were, Bri Bri. It felt exactly like a Lobdell issue. I think Justin Jordan is a terrific writer, but he has not gotten a toe-hold at DC Comics yet. “Superboy” needed a radical change, like “Green Arrow” got. Unfortunately, Jordan’s first issue was more of the same murky fight-heavy approach that has left me cold since the ‘H’el’ arc.
Brian: Of all of the radical New 52 reboots, “Superboy” and “Supergirl,” while not always hitting on all cylinders, had pretty defined ideas as to what the characters were supposed to be in this brave new world, and “Superboy,” especially, seemed poised to make a jump from that murky first year or two establishing zone into new territory. Instead, this was even a step back from the, frankly, surprisingly good #19.
Vince: It’s interesting to me that “Superboy” is one of the few “Young Justice” titles left. After LoSH is over, it and “Teen Titans” will be the only remaining books, right? I’m starting to think this is a “Young Justice” editorial problem more than it is a problem with the creative teams.
Brian: Check yo’ self, Vince. “Superboy” is a Superman family book. “Teen Titans” will be the ONLY Young Justice book left.
Zach:Speaking of editorial problems. Looking at future solicitations, it looks like “Superboy” is gearing up for another “Superman” driven crossover involving H.I.V.E. After reading “Superboy” #20 I was left wondering how much creative input Jordan was actually allowed. The issue smacked of an editorially manufactured story, another cog in Lobdell’s growing “Superman” machine. It’s uncomforting, as it seems other writers, such as Soule and Kot, were allowed a little more creative leeway.
Continued belowVince: How many shadowy organization and mysterious scientific projects can Lobdell come up with acronyms for?
Zach: Don’t doubt what Lobdell is capable of. That guy has tenacity, I’ll give him that. Just look at how hard he’s tried to make Harvest the next big DC villain.
Vince: Who?
Zach: Hahaha, exactly.
Zach: You know, it’s funny, but I think “Red Hood and the Outlaws” is another ex-Lobdell book that seems largely unchanged by its recent creative change. Also, I’m starting to see a recurring theme with these new directions. In several books, “Red Hood” and “Batwing” in particular, the writers are making changes that would have made more sense at the start of the New 52. For the first 20-odd issues we had a semi-redeemed Jason Todd, with pre-New 52 baggage intact, and a specifically African Batwing that still has strong ties to Gotham. It’s like DC tried to have its cake and eat it, only to realize it’s better to just start from scratch. Obviously, the same could be said about “Stormwatch” as well.
What did you guys think of “Red Hood?” Am I over-analyzing here?
Vince: I think that’s accurate, Zach. I was a little concerned when Tynion posted a timeline on Twitter to catch people up who hadn’t been reading “Red Hood”, but wanted to jump on to his run. I would have preferred that Tynion steer as far away from the Lobdell stuff as possible. Who knows – he may take the story in an interesting direction eventually, but his first issue didn’t inspire me to read something that I was already disliking.
Brian: I am pretty sure that I am the opposite of who DC wants to read “Red Hood” – I’m the guy who comes for Arsenal first, Starfire second, and Jason Todd third. And for that reason, I dropped the book like a bad habit a few issues in. I think Tynion is the sort of guy who could do good work on the book and, like Zach said, he’s at least trying to change up the status quo.
That said, I think comic fans are all weary of the so called “jumping on point,” that it was wise for Tynion to at least try to make his issue seem accessible by sharing what they’re already missed. I actually had this thought with “Suicide Squad,” too – how much more effective, marketing wise, would it have been to relaunch that book as “Secret Six” or even as “Suicide Squad: Cheesy New Title” #1. I hate #1s as much as any curmudgeon, but if the book will be going in a totally different direction, I don’t really see the point in continuing under a broken and untrusted name.
That said, these transitions aren’t always so chaotic. New “Supergirl” writer, Michael Alan Nelson, came on board mid-way through a two issue guest spot by Power Girl, and didn’t shake the boat much at all. Personally, that’s good news for me, as “Supergirl” has been, to me, the most consistent Super-book of the New 52. Did either of you guys notice anything drastically different about the issue?
Zach: Nelson’s take seems a lot more “jokey” than Johnson’s, based on the Sanctuary’s humorous attempts to destroy the “Not-Kara.” I don’t know if either of you play the video game “Portal,” but throughout the issue I read Sanctuary’s lines with GLaDOS’ voice, and it was perfect. Otherwise, it seems like business as usual for “Supergirl,” and in this case that’s a very good thing.
Vince: I think “Supergirl” is that one book that has gone sadly unsung since the ‘New 52’ started, but it’s been a consistently good read and Nelson’s issue was no exception. The further this book stays away from crossing over with what Lobdell and DeFalco were doing in the ‘Superman Family’, the better.
You know, if “Teen Titans” and the Superman books alone were to move into a better direction, the ‘New 52’ as a whole wouldn’t look nearly as bad. Those are some big titles being spoiled by dated comic book sensibilities.
Brian: While I agree, Vince, I don’t see how they would be able to do that without a Starlin-esque deus ex machina mindwiping just about every other character in the DC Universe. I think, personally, that Superman and the Teen Titans are the properties that always felt the “most” DC. Batman is almost a pulp hero; Green Lantern could be a Marvel cosmic property; speedsters are a dime a dozen. But those two properties, when going well, represented the best of what DC has to offer. And so, it is telling that when they suffer, the whole line appears to suffer.
Vince: Totally agreed. But I’m not against a mindwipe or a ridiculous retcon. Hell, they could relaunch the books with new #1’s, act like the old books never happened, and never explain what happened, and I honestly wouldn’t give a damn as long as the new books were good!
